Of the validity and licitude of the order of the Friars Minor Sub. from Bofete.
pdf with photographs
This article aims solely religious and doctrinal objectives, and it is based on public information and scrutinizing it against catholic doctrine, so to answer one question: are the Friars Minor from Bofete a valid order recognized as such by the Roman Catholic Church?
To answer this question, we must study its founder, the self-proclaimed Franciscan Friar Fr. Pedro Maria, OFM. Sub., his real name is Rodrigo Santos da Silva. Furthermore, we intend to demonstrate the reason for which we do not recommend to the Faithful to ingress in his “convent”.
We shall start by briefly illustrating the situation in which the religious orders fell after the death of Pius XII. They still existed through the succession of vows accepted by superiors and priors who had jurisdiction, such vows professed before “Council” Vatican II. Some religious orders are known to have clung to Tradition and rejected the false teachings of “Council” Vatican II, thus keeping an unaltered tradition through the ages up to our days.
According to the “Friars” from Bofete, in their publication “Sursum Corda”, Sedevacantist bishops do not possess any jurisdiction whatsoever, what is reaffirmed by those bishops themselves. To the Sedevacantist Catholics, valid solemn vows are only those which are professed under the superiors of these orders and under bishops, and that would be necessary to keep those orders active. The public vows (solemnly professed under the authority of a minister of the Church) are needed for a person to be considered a religious. If the vows taken are not public, they are considered private vows and do not confer the status of religious to someone, in accordance to the 1917 Code of Canon Law in the section which legislates on religious vows. Someone with a religious vocation must obligatorily go through certain stages; that is, in the Church, it is forbidden to take perpetual vows from one day to the other. Up until the point when one takes perpetual vows, they must follow uninterruptedly (Canon 577) such stages: it is necessary a minimum of six months as a candidate (Canon 539), and then one year of novitiate (Canon 542). After completing those, public vows are required, starting for temporary vows in that religious order.
Normally, three years after taking temporary vows, it is possible to profess perpetual vows. In the case in which there is no renew of the vows, it is considered that the person has abandoned them. Having taking perpetual vows the person – if they fulfil the requisites – can become a master of novices or prior of the religion and receive vows from other people.
The orders which have kept the Tradition amidst of the chaos of “Council” Vatican II were the Benedictines, Dominicans, Capuchins, some monks and nuns from the Oriental Rite, and the Franciscans under Bishop Vezelis. The latter interests us in this article as, we shall see, Fr. Pedro has not professed his vows under Bp. Vezelis nor under the Franciscan superior Fr. Francis Miller. Fr. Miller has professed his religious vows under Bp. Vezelis and afterwards has become superior of the Order of Friars Minor in the USA, demonstrating full support to these friars after the year 2020. (Fr. Miller’s website – https://ctkinglafayette.com/about/)
The friars are currently supported by the CMRI under Bp. Pivarunas, by the Priestly Society of Trent under Bp. Davila, and by Mater Dei Seminary under Bp. Espina. The latter two also operate under the CMRI. That said, they also enjoy the support of lay Sedevacantist influences, such as Mr. Takaki (an individual who considers the fact of Bugnini being a Freemason as a mere fable, and who currently resides in Japan) and Mr. Paulo Cavalcante (a seminarian of the MHT Seminary under Bp. Sanborn, who has himself joined the Third Order of Saint Francis of those friars and has adopted the onomastic John of Capistrano, all that after being expelled from St Joseph’s Seminary). The friars from Bofete are also supported by Fr. Gabriel Maria Rodrigues and Fr. Cardozo, who are connected to Bp. Espina. Those two priests consider the priests who do not follow the reformed rite of the Holy Week of 1955 and who do not celebrate the Feast of Saint Joseph the Worker to be in schism.
The religious history of Fr. Pedro Maria, OFM. Sub.
According to the website of the “Friars Minor”, they state to be a religious house by the name of Convent of St. Michael and St. Anthony, located at Bofete, São Paulo, keeping a traditionalist Franciscan discipline. They state that their convent was founded and established by Fr. Francis Miller and Fr. Pedro Maria Santos da Silva, whose mission is to continue the work initiated by St. Francis of Assisi, with help from Bp. Mark Anthony Pivarunas, superior general of the congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen (CMRI). According to them, their Guardian General is Fr. Miller who lives in the USA, and their Guardian Conventual is Fr. Pedro Maria – supposedly a solemnly professed Franciscan – who was initiated his religious life in 2004 and was ordained a priest in 2020. They consider themselves to be a primary order.
Fr. Pedro declares himself to be religious since 2004 (https://fradesmenores.com/sobre/), however, we must clarify this matter to the readers:
In their introduction video, published on their website on May 12, 2020 although the video was recorded back in 2019 (https://fradesmenores.com/2020/05/15/introducao-video-de-apresentacao-da-comunidade/), he says: “I am the Guardian of the Franciscan community at Atibaia […] I received my formation from old friars who managed to resist to the Council, and from one of them I have received my habit, and my intention was to make it possible that other young man could become Franciscans. Today, we are a community of five friars, one of which has professed his perpetual vows (we shall soon see who has taken those perpetual vows), three of which has professed simple vows, one who is a novice, in addition there are two young men waiting to be received into the order…”
First fact: Fr. Pedro has apostatized from the Novus Ordo and adhered to the Anglican Sect, a fact which he has concealed
Fr. Pedro Maria was a member of an association named Franciscans of the Gethsemani (a private association of Faithful, that is, not a proper religious order, but one of the many novelties found in the 1983 Code of Canon Law penned by Karol Wojtyła) when he was still attached to the Novus Ordo. Apparently, he joined this association in 2001, and left it in 2006. We do not know about his whereabouts nor what he has done between 2006 and 20011, but we do know that he became an Anglican in 2012. Fr. Pedro has indeed belonged to the Anglican heresy and within it joined an Anglican “Franciscan” order, namely the Order of the Franciscan Missionaries. However, from the Catholic doctrinary point of view, this order is considered to be utterly and completely null, invalid, and without any effect whatsoever. It was only in 2014 that he has left the Anglican sect, claiming that he would return to the association of the “Franciscans” of Gethsemani.
According to the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, he cannot be considered to be religious, but he is actually a heretic until he publicly abjures from his heresy. If he considers himself to be a Franciscan friar professed since 2004 having abandoned the religion to become Anglican, giving up his habit, and everything else, his also to be considered an apostate.
Canon 646: §1: Upon the fact, they are considered as legitimately dismissed religious: 1° Those who are public apostates from the Catholic Faith.
When a catholic leaves Catholicism and adheres to the Anglican sect, he becomes a heretic, even though he may return to the catholic communion provided that he performs a public abjuration of such sect. There are necessary prescriptions on how a heretic can be readmitted into the Roman Catholic Church, and such ceremony shall be shown at the end of the article.
Second Fact: Fr. Pedro proclaims himself to be Franciscan without having ever had known liaisons whatsoever to any Franciscan order, even when still a member of the Novus Ordo
After leaving Anglicanism, Fr. Pedro returned to his old association of the “Franciscans” of Gethsemani. It is worthy to note once again that it is a private association of the Faithful – one of the many modernist novelties of Wojtyła – and which has only became a public association of the Faithful in 2021, without any character of religious order. This association is named “Franciscan Fraternity of Gethsemani” and strives to imitate the rule of the Third Order of Saint Francis with a twist, that is, “the Gethsemani spirituality”, in other words, without any relation with the Franciscan Religion. Its superior and founder is Friar Paulino Alves Neto, according to reports. Fr. Pedro considers Fr. Paulino as the founding father of his order, but this is according to the reports of members of this Gethsemani association. Recently, in 2023, Fr. Pedro has done a “unpleasant surprise visit” to these Franciscans from the Novus Ordo and has prayed upon the tomb of Fr. Paulino. Therefore, one can say that such reports are indeed true. (To read the full history of this community, here is their current website: http://franciscanosdoGethsemani.org.br/). Friar Paulino has professed his perpetual vows in 1973 in a Novus Ordo Society called the Society of the Joseleitos (portmanteau of José + eleitos / Joseph + elects) of Christ, which has been approved only at 1985. Nonetheless, it is not a Franciscan Order. Friar Paulino has left the Society of “Joseleitos” and joined a Fraternity at the City of Maria da Fé, Minas Gerais, where he began to assist the Novus Ordo diocesan bishops in philanthropic endeavors.
He then began to idealize the founding of a fraternity of Franciscan spirituality there, over time would fight for its recognition within the Novus Ordo Church. Such recognition only came to be by 2021, but unfortunately Fr. Paulino has passed away before he could see his dream come true. It was Friar Paulino who accepted Br. Rodrigo (Friar Pedro) once again in his fraternity around 2014, as a postulant, and he made his novitiate vows in 2015, adopting the onomastic of Friar Pedro Maria.
According to the current superiors of the Franciscan Fraternity of Gethsemani, Friar Pedro did not conclude his novitiate, neither has he professed any vow, be it temporary or perpetual (given that the fraternity was not yet recognized), and he left it around 2016, stating the necessity of taking care of his health, but since he has never returned. Moreover, this fraternity was not at the time recognized by the Novus Ordo Church, and its superior seemingly had not a traditionalist posture, in accordance to what can be clearly seen on his Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/freipaulino.alvesneto).
Are those the Franciscans from whom Fr. Pedro states to having received traditional formation and his habit from?
Here we have three facts that are interesting to the Catholics about Fr. Pedro:
1) He has not abjured from his heresy, and to all canonical effects is still considered to be a non-Catholic;
2) He has not finished his novitiate, has not taken further vows, which configures the loss of religious state;
3) His religion is also invalidated by the 1917 CIC: Canon 542:
§1 They are invalidly admitted to the novitiate: A) Who adhere to non-Catholic sects.
Today Friar Pedro designates himself as O.F.M Sub. what sort of novelty is that? Has he the authority to create new branches of the Order of Friars Minor? Is it a fad now, that Carmelites and Franciscans coming from the Novus Ordo to claim the authority of creating new branches of their religious orders that have never been seen before? It seems to be what is stated in their statute:
“§1 The brothers of Saint Francis Association is also denominated followers of the Order of Friars Minor, in Latin Ordinem Fratrum Minorum Subsequentes, and the brethren to it associated receive after their religious name the acronym O.F.M Sub”.
Do they want to continue the Franciscan work in such manner? How is it possible to continue a work to which one has never belonged? One which such person has never finished his novitiate? In which one has never professed his temporary vows of three years, needed to profess perpetual vows afterwards and also needed to be ordained a priest and to be made prior? How is it possible to accept novices and guide the souls with the Franciscan spirituality without ever having had experience in any traditional Franciscan order whatsoever? Have Sedevacantists become outlaws? The Novus Ordo religious who indeed practice the vow of obedience and follow the laws seem to be more apt for salvation than the Sedevacantist “religious”. Are we to accept that anyone coming from the Novus Ordo proclaims himself to be prior, hiding his past refusing to recognize that his modernist religion is invalid and unwilling to obey and subject himself to no man? Are we to throw the entire 1917 Code of Canon Law in the rubbish bin or are we to observe all that we can which does not hinder the salvation of souls?
Canon 489: Rules and particular constitutions of individual religious institutes not contrary to the Canons of this Code retain their force; but those that are opposed are abrogated.
Third Fact: Abjuration and regularization, invalid or doubtful?
Back in 2017 (one year after leaving the Franciscan Fraternity of Gethsemani), Fr. Pedro joined the Monastery of the Holy Cross (Nova Friburgo, Rio de Janeiro) claiming to be a Franciscan friar coming from the Novus Ordo. During this period, he affirms to having done his supposed abjuration from the Anglican sect (revealed to the public only around 2021), according to an annexed document at the end of the article. An abjuration is an essential document to receive valid sacraments in the Roman Catholic Church, in which one abandons ALL his past in a heretical sect to truthfully embrace Catholic Faith.
In the document signed in 2017 by Fr. Pedro and Bp. Thomas Aquinas, a Bishop of the SSPX-Resistance, we must observe certain details:
1) There is a lack of two witnesses besides the minister who presides the abjuration. It is obligatory for two witnesses to be present, besides the priest, who sign the document of abjuration, for it to be considered valid.
Canon 2314: […] Abjuration is considered juridically done if it happens in the presence of the same local ordinary or his delegate and at least two witnesses.
2) Fr. Pedro has signed this abjuration document using his “Franciscan” onomastic which was suppressed in 2016, instead of using his civil name (Rodrigo Santos da Silva). This second point is of great significance, for Fr. Pedro has omitted this fact from many people, including priests, claiming to be a “traditional Franciscan” coming for the Novus Ordo to the Monastery of the Holy Cross, and afterwards has told the same narrative to Bp. Dolan, completely hiding both his past in the sect of Henry VIII and the details of his “Franciscan formation”.
I ask myself how he could declare himself to be religious from 2004 if he only left the Anglican sect in 2017. It seems to me that he has not completely abandoned his past.
Even if by benevolence we consider the abjuration to be valid, we must add: Would Bp. Thomas Aquinas and the Monastery of the Holy Cross accept the modernist Franciscan orders as valid? If so, would them at the time accept people who have only left Anglicanism in 2017, while they claim to be religious before they abandoned it? If not, who has recognized Fr. Pedro as a Franciscan (O.F.M – Order of Friars Minor, as stated by the Monastery of The Holy Cross)? In which valid catholic Franciscan order has studied and made his public vows? Who has given him the dignity of religious superior or prior? If he has not taken perpetual vows, how has he kept his temporary vows uninterrupted, and who was his Franciscan master during this period? Would a Benedictine Monastery accept Franciscans or vows professed by Franciscans? We know that the SSPX-Resistance is connected and has a good standing with the Capuchin Franciscans of Morgon, in France. Why then have not they sent Fr. Pedro there? Have they, on the contrary, considered it to be valid all his religion and considered him to be a Friar Minor? It seems, and current evidence corroborates it, that in fact the former Anglican went into the monastery in 2017, abjured from his heresy, became a Friar Minor within one year, refused to go to France to join the Capuchins there, was named prior and superior of the order, gave habits and accepted vows, acting as a Master of Novices, as it can be seen in this video from the SSPX-Resistance from 2018: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgWKvtKY7QM
However, Fr. Pedro has not been through a novitiate in the Friars Minor, he professed no vows, he was removed from the Novus Ordo religion in 2016 and, in 2017, immediately after his abjuration (or maybe even before, as he signed it as Fr. Pedro), became prior of the O.F.M with complete approval from Bp. Thomas Aquinas.
How has Bp. Thomas Aquinas regularized the religious situation in which Fr. Pedro found himself? How can Fr. Pedro be considered a Friar Minor in the video linked above? In which circumstances and what is his current canonical situation? The SSPX-Resistance owes an answer to all Catholics.
Fourth Fact: Invalid perpetual profession according to the Roman Catholic Church
In 2018, Friar Pedro and his “Friars” were sent to Atibaia, São Paulo, to Saint Joseph’s chapel, which at the time was overseen by Fr. Rodrigo da Silva (no relation), currently a bishop, who was at the time connected to the SSPX-Resistance and obeyed the order given to him by Bp. Thomas Aquinas to receive the friars, as can be seen here
“Have the friars stablished their novitiate at St. Joseph’s Chapel in Atibaia”? So, in 2018, did Fr. Pedro have the approval of Bp. Thomas Aquinas to be a Franciscan prior and to receive novices in his made-up Order of Friars Minor?
Canon 543: The right of admitting to the novitiate and to subsequent religious profession, whether temporary or perpetual, pertains to Superiors with the vote of the Council of Chapter, according to the special constitution of each religious institute.
Canon 505: Major Superiors are temporary, unless the constitutions indicate otherwise; local minor Superiors are not to be constituted for a Term in excess of three years; but which term having been completed, they can assume the same responsibility again if the constitution so provide, but not a third time immediately in the same religious house.
Canon 504: With due regard for the constitutions of religious [institutes] that require a more advanced age or other qualities, they are incapable of the office of major Superior who have not been professed in that same institute for at least ten years calculated from first profession, or who were not born from a legitimate marriage, or who have not completed forty years of age if it concerns the supreme Moderator of a religious [institute] of women or Superioress in a monastery of nuns; or [who are not yet] thirty years [of age] for other major Superiors.
Canon 559: § 1. The Master who is to be over the instruction of novices shall be at least five and thirty years of age, at least ten years from first profession, conspicuous for prudence, charity, piety, and religious observance, and if it concerns a religious [institute] of clerics, one constituted in the priesthood.
§ 2. If it seems expedient because of the number of novices or for some other reason, an associate Master of novices shall be added subject immediately to him in those things that look to the governance of the novitiate, [and who is] at least thirty years of age, at least five years from first profession, and [being possessed of] other necessary and opportune qualities.
§ 3. Both shall be freed of all other offices and burdens that could impede the care and governance of the novices.
Friar Pedro has obscured all his Anglican past and his supposed “Franciscan formation” when he arrived at Atibaia, SP, as can be seen in the introduction video from his community in their own website. They claim to be “traditional Franciscans”, and, with the support of Bp. Thomas Aquinas, their claims have been considered worthy of trust.
In July 2018, Fr. Rodrigo da Silva has left the SSPX-Resistance and became Sedevacantist, receiving full support from Bp. Dolan and Fr. Cekada. Back then, the supposed “Friars Minor” also adhered to the Sedevacantist position. In October of the same year, all of them gathered at Atibaia, including Fr. da Silva, Fr. Leandro Neves, Mr. Wagner de Almeida, and the so-called Friars Minor, to discuss the foundation of Bp. Dolan’s Seminary at Brazil. After some controversy, Fr. Neves and Mr. Almeida abandoned the project. Nevertheless, in February 2019, St. Joseph’s Seminary was founded, having Fr. da Silva as its rector and Fr. Hector Romero as auxiliar teacher. Back in those days, Mr. Diogo R. Moreira from the YouTube channel “Controvérsia Católica” was among the seminarians.
Bp. Dolan’s impressions on the Brazilian Catholics.
“I am happy to have returned Wednesday from an excellent and most encouraging trip to Brazil. It seems they were all mostly young people, seminarians and Third Order Franciscan Friars and big young families, expertly led by newly ordained Fr. Rodrigo Da Silva. Sunday’s Pontifical Mass and thirty some Confirmations drew faithful from all over Brazil, a very large country indeed. It was also good to get to know and speak with our young vocations, and such militant Catholics. Their school year starts this month, late Summer in Brazil. Their land, once so Catholic before the cursed council of Vatican II, must be reclaimed for Christ by His Mother, patroness of Brazil under the title of Aparecida, “The one who has appeared”, Mary Immaculate.” (Septuagesima bulletin, published on February 16, 2019)
Bp. Dolan’s visit to Brazil happened from February 7th to February 12th, 2019 and we can observe that, for Bp. Dolan the “Franciscans” were but a Third Order.
“Greeting ladies and gentleman,
On this video (https://youtu.be/D4ObJ-fPObw) Fr. Rodrigo da Silva and I make some solemnly pronouncements of utterly importance for Sedevacantists in Brazil. Briefly, it pertains to the following: His Most Reverend Excellency Bp. Daniel Dolan will visit Brazil in November of this year [2019] to confer the Minor Orders and the Subdiaconate to Fr. Pedro Maria…”
Bp. Dolan has ordained Fr. Pedro Maria, O.F.M Sub., to the Subdiaconate on November 10th 2019, as it can be noted from the sermon of the occasion on this video: (https://youtu.be/Ud-9niO42ME).
It is important to remember that Fr. Pedro has omitted all of his past and was only given credit in his Franciscan profession thanks to Bp. Thomas Aquinas and his narrative of “I was formed by Franciscans who have resisted to the Council”. He should have told EVERYTHING to the man who ordained him.
Something odd has happened during his time at the seminary, as is patented from this link: (https://controversiacatolica.com/502). Fr. Pedro has professed O.F.M perpetual vows under the Rev. Fr. Héctor Romero on October 4th 2019!
Fr. Romero owes an explanation on how did this happened. Is he perchance a Friar Minor with perpetual vows for more than ten years or, in the best of hypothesis, a bishop? Can a mere priest accept vows from a Franciscan lacking a valid novitiate, and without a master? In fact, I do not know what happened here. Nevertheless, for all effects, if Fr. Romero did this, be assured it was null and invalid, as we have demonstrated in this article (without a novitiate and temporary vows of at least three uninterrupted years, perpetual vows are null). Fr. Romero must explain himself. I know that he knew not of Friar Pedro’s past and was deceived by his narrative (and even if such narrative was true, Fr. Romero could not accept perpetual vows according to the laws of the Church).
Besides all of this, all those present at the seminary and even some faithful are witnesses of the following fact:
Friar Pedro did not conclude his theology studies (he has only coursed the 1st year) and, yet still, in 2020, has suddenly left the seminary so that he could be ordained a priest by Bp. Dávila, a Mexican prelate with ties to the CMRI. It was all a surprise, and a very unpleasant surprise for everyone at the Seminary. On one day he was at the side of his “friend” to whom he says he wants to follow up until the end, and, all of a sudden, on the following morning, he wakes up to never see him again, with his luggage packed, standing far away at the road, without any previous notice.
Little before this date, the “Friars” were for the first time introduced to Fr. Miller, the first Franciscan to appear in the history. However, the talk between them was mediate by the only seminarian who knew English at the time, and there was no mention of Fr. Pedro’s Anglican past, or of his “traditional Franciscan” experience on the Novus Ordo. It was only a friendly gathering of Franciscan friars. It is worthy of note that soon after this gathering, Fr. Miller has fallen apart with Bp. Sanborn, of the RCI, and joined Bp. Pivarunas’ CMRI, in a very similar situation to the “friars” in Brazil.
About his time at St. Joseph’s Seminary, it has been reported that they have solely followed the regulations of the same seminary and did not keep any Franciscan rule. Therefore, what kind of Franciscan are these? We do not know if Fr. Miller had science of these facts, but it seems that he accepts Fr. Pedro’s profession at the Anglican Franciscan Order and at the Novus Ordo Franciscan Fraternity of the Gethsemani as being valid, once he accepted him as prior and as master of the religious house at Bofete. Fr. Pedro was not treated as novice, but as a Franciscan who professed perpetual vows.
It has been stated that Fr. Miller has been designated as guardian of the so-called Order of Friars Minor from Bofete, nevertheless, he has only met Fr. Pedro in 2020 (their statute affirms that they were founded on 2020). What sort of Franciscan order is that “Friar” Pedro that existed before 2020? Before this first meeting with a Franciscan friar, he simply acted without any connection with any traditional Franciscan order, acting as prior of religious house, master of novices, and accepting vows from others, without having gone through any novitiate, which is required by the 1917 CIC, and without fulfilling any of the criteria necessary for his validity.
Canon 572:
§ 1. For the validity of any religious profession it is required that:
1º The one who is to give it must have the legitimate age according to the norm of Canon 573;
2º The legitimate Superior according to the constitutions admits him to profession;
3º A valid novitiate according to the norm of Canon 555 will have preceded;
4º The profession be given without force or grave fear or dolus;
5º It be express;
6º It be received by the legitimate Superior according to the constitutions personally or through another.
§ 2. But for the validity of perpetual profession, whether solemn or simple, there is also required that a simple temporary profession according to the norm of Canon 574 will have preceded.
Fifth Fact: Ordination without the necessary Theology studies.
Bp. Dávila has ordained Fr. Pedro to the Priesthood in 2020, even though as a seminarian he had not concluded even his first theology year, furthermore His Excellency had no knowledge of his past whatsoever. It was only after his ordination to the priesthood in 2020 that Fr. Pedro’s Anglican past came to light, through the broadcast done by the SSPX-Resistance of a dossier about him. How can someone without even one year of theology studies be ordained a priest? How can someone be ordained without any evaluation from his seminary teachers to confirm his priestly aptitude? Was Bp. Dávila aware of all of this?
It would be up to Monsignor Dávila to require documents that could prove that Friar Pedro was qualified to hear confessions and celebrate Mass, and the same bishop should prove that he knew of Friar Pedro’s erroneous abjuration and that his religious profession was utterly invalid. Even if we concede that he had privately studied is there any documentation that evaluate his private studies?
There are witnesses who confirm that even at Saint Joseph’s Seminary, not even his own “friars” had knowledge of his heretical pass. This caused great turmoil, for it was him who gave the habits to them and who affirmed that he was formed by traditional Friars Minor.
Friar Pedro did not communicate to no one that he had been a member of a heretical sect, neither did he mentioned anything about his Franciscan formation, and yet still he received the Subdiaconate after adhering to the Sedevacantist position, after he left the Monastery of the Holy Cross. To receive Orders in such manner is absolutely forbidden by the Church. He was obliged to reveal all his past and shown his abjuration document, but only after his priestly ordination, when a member of the SSPX-Resistance leaked information on his past, has that document become public after heavy pressure from third-parties.
He was ordained a Priest without concluding his theological and liturgical studies. There is testimony that, at the seminary, he studied theology for less than one year under Fr. Romero. Supposing that he only considers himself to be a Friar Minor after having met Fr. Miller (2020), then his ordination went against the instruction Quantum Religiones on the admission of religious to Holy Orders, such document promulgated by the Holy Congregation of Religious on December 31st 1931 (A.A.S, XXIV, 74). This document states that religious may not receive major orders before professing perpetual vows, neither before they have spent three years under temporary vows, and that without mentioning other clauses on the invalidity of the receiving of Minor Orders. We must emphasize that this document is bound to be obeyed, as expressly declared in itself, by all religious exempt or not.
It’s worthy of note that Fr. Pedro, at the time he was at the seminary, rejected the 1955 reformed Holy Week and, suddenly, he went on to adhere to it. Is there any human respect for the CMRI or is it all a lack of theological principles? Whatever be the case, those facts provide more reasons to believe he’s not worthy of trust.
Sixth Fact: Approval of the Una Cum Mass and Matrimonial Courts.
If the Bofete friars have started to defend the “reformed” Holy Week because of the CMRI, have they also started to allow their faithful to attend Una Cum Masses? Does Fr. Pedro approve or reject the attitude of CMRI clergy in recommending the attendance of SSPX Masses if there are no Sedevacantist Masses available? Have they also started to defend the institution of Matrimonial Courts, which are reserved to the Holy See, and are usurped by the SSPX and CMRI who give away, according to their own judgement, declaration of matrimonial nullity, causing scandal in between the faithful by permitting people under second unions to partake in communion?
It would be good if the Bofete “friars” released a pronouncement on these CMRI practices. Or would they rather remain silent to keep their material assistance from the CMRI, which financial structure was in great amount attained through drug trafficking, blackmail (i. e. having married women leave their husbands to join the religious life, in a way that they can materially benefit the CMRI themselves), and extorsions by their founder, Francis Schuckardt?
Given the silence of the friars over the organization for which they work, it sticks like sore thumb that they consent to all of this.
Conclusion
Finally, I repeat: are we going to accept that anyone who clothes themselves in religious robes and who self-proclaims superior and prior of a religious order from day to night? Or even that someone who has not concluded his novitiate in a religion (or even worse, in a society), and comes to the traditional mean pretending to be a traditional Franciscan? Or yet still, someone who intends to be superior without having being inferior and who does not wish to go through any study or evaluation of traditional seminaries? If so, I must say Sedevacantism is becoming a madhouse.
Let us seriously reflect: would this be “continuing the legacy of St. Francis of Assisi”? Evidently not. A man who preaches that his religion lives in accordance with the principles of St. Francis of Assisi, but he himself lives in a complete opposite manner, who enjoy material goods that go against the principles of Franciscan poverty, who possesses extremely expensive luxurious chess sets, who eats chocolate made by luxury brands, and much more, as we can clearly see in his videos on his YouTube Channel Bona Ventura. Once again, I ask: is this living according to the legacy of St. Francis of Assisi? A Saint who has always preached in his order the importance of its members living in the gravest poverty possible, being that among all religious orders, the Franciscan is that which is almost a synonym to poverty. Moreover, it’s worthy to remember that have always supported “Friar James of Saint Joseph” and had not the honesty to admit to that when controversial opinions on him became public, and that Bp. Espina did the same. As a matter of fact, what a great irony, at least “Friar” James did not come from Anglicanism, which is, in questions of principle, better. Would any sensible Catholic support a priest who seems not to possess any of the necessary capacity to hear his confessions? Think about how problematic it would be for your salvation to be under a priest who does not know how to identify your sin while you confess it.
For all that has been exposed, with completely faithfulness to the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church, we do not consider this order to be valid, neither its prior to be a religious, but rather a mere doubtful and obscure priest, and that is to be benevolent.
Therefore, we shall never recommend them, for we love the work of Saint Francis of Assisi, the Truth, and the just and secure doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church.
Jorge Meri & Joseph Airam, translated by Ignasi Joanis
5th of June 2023, Feast of Mary the Holy Queen, Saint Anthony, pray for us.
Reception of Converts and Profession of Faith
Roman Ritual, 1944, Supplement for North America (According to the form approved by the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, July 20, 1859 and with the New Formula for the abjuration and profession of faith to be made by converts, approved by the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office as given in the "Ecclesiastical Review," May, 1942)
In the case of a convert, careful inquiry should first of all be made concerning the validity of their former Baptism. If it be found that there is no Baptism or that the Baptism received was invaid, they must now be baptized unconditionally. If, however, after diligent inquiry reasonable doubt remains concerning the validity of their former Baptism, they are now to be baptized conditionally. If, thirdly, the former Baptism be judged to have been valid, only Abjuration or Profession of Faith should be required. In accordance, therefore, with their condition there are three methods of receiving converts:
I. If never baptized or if the previous Baptism was invalid -- The convert is unconditionally baptized, and neither Abjuration nor absolution follows, since the Sacrament of Regeneration washes away all.
II. If the previous Baptism was doubtful -- The convert is conditionally baptized, the following procedure being observed: 1. Abjuration or Profession of Faith and conditional absolution from censures. 2. Conditional Baptism. 3. Sacramental Confession with conditional absolution.
III. If the previous Baptism was valid -- 1. Abjuration or Profession of Faith. 2. Absolution from censures. 3. Supplying of Ceremonies of Baptism (see form for adults [or of children, according to more recent decrees]) if desired.
The priest vested in surplice and violet sits in front before the middle of the altar or, if the Blessed Sacrament is present, on the Epistle side. The convert kneels before him and with his right hand on the book of the Gospels (or the missal) reads the following: (If the convert cannot read the Priest reads it to him slowly and distinctly, so he may understand and repeat the words.)
PROFESSION OF FAITH
I, N.N., ______ years of age, born outside the Catholic Church, have held and believed errors contrary to her teaching. Now, enlightened by divine grace, I kneel before you, Reverend Father _____________, having before my eyes and touching with my hand the holy Gospels. And with firm faith I believe and profess each and all the articles contained in the Apostles' Creed, that is: I believe in God, the Father almighty, Creator of heaven and earth; and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord, Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried; He descended into hell, the third day He arose again from the dead; He ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God, the Father almighty, from thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy Catholic Church; the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting. Amen.
I admit and embrace most firmly the apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions and all the other constitutions and prescriptions of the Church.
I admit the Sacred Scriptures according to the sense which has been held and is held by Holy Mother Church, whose duty it is to judge the true sense and interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures, and I shall never accept or interpret them except according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.
I profess that the sacraments of the New Law are, truly and precisely, seven in number, instituted for the salvation of mankind, though all are not necessary for each individual: Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Holy Orders, and Matrimony. I profess that all confer grace, and that of these Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Orders cannot be repeated without sacrilege.
I also accept and admit the ritual of the Catholic Church in the solemn administration of all the above mentioned Sacraments.
I accept and hold, in each and every part, all that has been defined and declared by the Sacred Council of Trent concerning Original Sin and Justification. I profess that in the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist is really, truly and substantially the Body and Blood together with the Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that there takes place what the Church calls transubstantiation, that is, the change of all the substance of the bread into the Body of Christ and of all the substance of wine into the Blood. I confess also that in receiving under either of these species one receives Jesus Christ, whole and entire.
I firmly hold that Purgatory exists and that the souls detained there can be helped by the prayers of the faithful. Likewise I hold that the saints, who reign with Jesus Christ, should be venerated and invoked, that they offer prayers to God for us and that their relics are to be venerated.
I firmly profess that the images of Jesus Christ and of the Mother of God, ever Virgin, as well as of all the saints, should be given due honor and veneration. I also affirm that Jesus Christ left to the Church the faculty to grant indulgences, and that their use is most salutary to the Christian people. I recognize the Holy, Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church as the mother and teacher of all the churches, and I promise and swear true obedience to the Roman Pontiff, successor of St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles and Vicar of Jesus Christ.
Besides I accept, without hesitation, and profess all that has been handed down, defined, and declared by the Sacred Canons and by the general Councils, especially by the Sacred Council of Trent and by the Vatican General Council, and in a special manner concerning the primacy and infallibility of the Roman Pontiff. At the same time I condemn and reprove all that the Church has condemned and reproved. This same Catholic Faith, outside of which nobody can be saved, I now freely profess and to which I truly adhere, the same I promise and swear to maintain and profess with the help of God, entire, inviolate and with firm constancy until the last breath of life; and I shall strive, as far as possible, that this same Faith shall be held, taught, and publicly professed by all who depend on me and by those of whom I shall have charge.
So help me God and these holy Gospels.
The convert remains kneeling, and the priest still seated says the Miserere (Psalm 50) or the De profundis (Psalm 129), adding Gloria Patri at the end.
Psalmus 50
Psalm 50
Miserere mei, Deus, secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Have mercy on me, O God, according to thy great mercy.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum, dele iniquitatem meam.
And according to the multitude of thy tender mercies, blot out my iniquity.
Amplius lava me ab iniquitate mea: et a peccato meo munda me.
Wash me yet more from my iniquity: and cleanse me from my sin.
Quoniam iniquitatem meam ego cognosco: et peccatum meum contra me est semper.
For I know my iniquity: and my sin is always before me.
Tibi soli peccavi, et malum coram te feci: ut iustificeris in sermonibus tuis, et vincas cum iudicaris.
To thee only have I sinned, and have done evil before thee: that thou mayest be justified in thy words, and mayest overcome when thou art judged.
Ecce enim in iniquitatibus conceptus sum: et in peccatis concepit me mater mea.
For, behold, I was conceived in iniquities: and in sins did my mother conceive me.
Ecce enim veritatem dilexisti: incerta et occulta sapientiae tuae manifestasti mihi.
For, behold, thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.
Asparges me hysopo, et mundabor: lavabis me, et super nivem dealbabor.
Thou shalt sprinkle me with hyssop, and I shall be cleansed: thou shalt wash me, and I shall be made whiter than snow.
Auditui meo dabis gaudium et laetitiam: et exsultabunt ossa humiliata.
To my hearing thou shalt give joy and gladness: and the bones that have been humbled shall rejoice.
Averte faciem tuam a peccatis meis: et omnes iniquitates meas dele.
Turn away thy face from my sins: and blot out all my iniquities.
Cor mundum crea in me, Deus: et spiritum rectum innova in visceribus meis.
Create a clean heart in me, O God: and renew a right spirit within my bowels.
Ne proicias me a facie tua: et spiritum sanctum tuum ne auferas a me.
Cast me not away from thy face: and take not thy holy spirit from me.
Redde mihi laetitiam salutaris tui: et spiritu principali confirma me.
Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation: and strengthen me with a perfect spirit.
Docebo iniquos vias tuas: et impii ad te convertentur.
I will teach the unjust thy ways: and the wicked shall be converted to thee.
Libera me de sanguinibus, Deus, Deus salutis meae: exultabit lingua mea iustitiam tuam.
Deliver me from blood, O God, thou God of my salvation: and my tongue shall extol thy justice.
Domine, labia mea aperies: et os meum adnuntiabit laudem tuam.
O Lord, thou wilt open my lips: and my mouth shall declare thy praise.
Quoniam si voluisses sacrificium dedissem utique: holocaustis non delectaberis.
For if thou hadst desired sacrifice, I would indeed have given it: with burnt-offerings thou wilt not be delighted.
Sacrificium Deo spiritus contribulatus: cor contritum, et humiliatum, Deus, non despicies.
A sacrifice to God is an afflicted spirit: a contrite and humbled heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.
Benigne fac, Domine, in bona voluntate tua Sion: ut aedificentur muri Jerusalem.
Deal favourably, O Lord, in thy good-will with Sion; that the walls of Jerusalem may be built up.
Tunc acceptabis sacrificium justitiae, oblationes, et holocausta: tunc inponent super altare tuum vitulos.
Then shalt thou accept the sacrifice of justice, oblations and whole burnt offerings: then shall they lay calves upon thy altar.
Gloria Patri...
Glory be...
Psalmus 129
Psalm 129
De profundis clamavi ad te, Domine: Domine, exaudi vocem meam:
Out of the depths I have cried to thee, O Lord: Lord, hear my voice:
Fiant aures tuae intendentes, in vocem deprecationis meae.
Let thy ears be attentive to the voice of my supplication.
Si iniquitates observaveris, Domine: Domine, quis sustinebit?
If thou, O Lord, wilt mark iniquities: Lord, who shall stand it?
Quia apud te propitiatio est: propter legem tuam sustinui te, Domine.
For with thee there is merciful forgiveness: and by reason of thy law, I have waited for thee, O Lord.
Sustinuit anima mea in verbum ejus: speravit anima mea in Domino.
My soul hath relied on his word: my soul hath hoped in the Lord.
A custodia matutina usque ad noctem: speret Israel in Domino.
From the morning watch even until night: let Israel hope in the Lord.
Quia apud Dominum misericordia: et copiosa apud eum redemptio.
Because with the Lord there is mercy: and with him plentiful redemption.
Et ipse redimet Israel, ex omnibus iniquitatibus ejus.
And he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities.
Gloria Patri...
Glory be...
The priest, standing, now says:
Kyrie eleison. Christe eleison. Kyrie eleison. Pater noster (secreto usque ad)
Lord, have mercy on us. Christ, have mercy on us. Lord have mercy on us. Our Father (inaudibly until)
V. Et ne nos inducas in tentationem.
V. And lead us not into temptation.
R. Sed libera nos a malo.
R. But deliver us from evil.
V. Salvum fac servum tuum (ancillam tuam.)
V. Preserve thy servant (handmaid).
R. Deus meus, sperantem in te.
R. Who trusts in thee, my God.
V. Domine, exaudi orationem meam.
V. O Lord, hear my prayer.
R. Et clamor meus ad te veniat.
R. And let my cry come unto thee.
V. Dominus vobiscum.
V. The Lord be with thee.
R. Et cum spiritu tuo.
R. And with thy spirit.
Oremus. Let us pray.
DEUS, cui proprium est miserere semper et parcere; suscipe deprecationem nostram, ut hunc famulum tuum (hanc famulam tuam) quem (quam) excommunicationis catena constringit, miseratio tuae pietatis clementer absolvat. Per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum Filium tuum: Qui tecum vivit et regnat in unitate Spiritus Sancti Deus, per omnia saecula saeculorum. Amen.
O God, Whose nature it is ever to show mercy and to spare, receive our petition, that this thy servant (handmaid) bound by the fetters of excommunication may by thy sweet forgiveness be pardoned. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, thy Son, Who liveth and reigneth with Thee in the unity of the Holy Ghost, God, forever and ever. Amen.
The priest, seated, pronounces the absolution from excommunication as follows, inserting the word "forsan" ("perchance") if in doubt of its incurrence:
Auctoritate apostolica, qua fungor in hac parte, absolvo te a vinculo excommunicationis quam (forsan) incurristi, et restituo te sacrosanctis Ecclesiae sacramentis, communioni et unitati fidelium. In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.
By the authority of the Holy See which I exercise here, I absolve thee from the bond of excommunication which (perchance) thou hast incurred, and I restore thee to the holy Sacraments of the Church, to the communion and unity of the faithful. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.
Lastly, the priest imposes some salutary penance, such as prayers or a visit to a church.
Comments